Comparison of micro-ultrasound and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer: A multicenter, prospective analysis.
Journal
Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada
ISSN: 1911-6470
Titre abrégé: Can Urol Assoc J
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101312644
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 2021
01 2021
Historique:
pubmed:
24
7
2020
medline:
24
7
2020
entrez:
24
7
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
High-resolution micro-ultrasound has the capability of imaging prostate cancer based on detecting alterations in ductal anatomy, analogous to multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI). This technology has the potential advantages of relatively low cost, simplicity, and accessibility compared to mpMRI. This multicenter, prospective registry aims to compare the sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), and positive predictive value (PPV) of mpMRI with high-resolution micro-ultrasound imaging for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. We included 1040 subjects at 11 sites in seven countries who had prior mpMRI and underwent ExactVu micro-ultrasound-guided biopsy. Biopsies were taken from both mpMRI targets (Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System [PI-RADS] >3 and micro-ultrasound targets (Prostate Risk Identification using Micro-ultrasound [PRIMUS] >3). Systematic biopsies (up to 14 cores) were also performed. Various strategies were used for mpMRI target sampling, including cognitive fusion with micro-ultrasound, separate software-fusion systems, and software-fusion using the micro-ultrasound FusionVu system. Clinically significant cancer was those with Gleason grade group ≥2. Overall, 39.5% were positive for clinically significant prostate cancer. Micro-ultrasound and mpMRI sensitivity was 94% vs. 90%, respectively (p=0.03), and NPV was 85% vs. 77%, respectively. Specificities of micro-ultrasound and MRI were both 22%, with similar PPV (44% vs. 43%). This represents the initial experience with the technology at most of the participating sites and, therefore, incorporates a learning curve. Number of cores, diagnostic strategy, blinding to MRI results, and experience varied between sites. In this initial multicenter registry, micro-ultrasound had comparable or higher sensitivity for clinically significant prostate cancer compared to mpMRI, with similar specificity. Micro-ultrasound is a low-cost, single-session option for prostate screening and targeted biopsy. Further larger-scale studies are required for validation of these findings.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32701437
pii: cuaj.6712
doi: 10.5489/cuaj.6712
pmc: PMC7769516
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
E11-E16Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Type : ErratumIn
Références
Radiology. 2016 Sep;280(3):793-804
pubmed: 27035179
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2018 Nov;84(11):2522-2534
pubmed: 30032482
Ultrasound Med Biol. 2018 Jul;44(7):1341-1354
pubmed: 29627083
Lancet. 2017 Feb 25;389(10071):815-822
pubmed: 28110982
Lancet Oncol. 2019 Jan;20(1):100-109
pubmed: 30470502
Eur Urol. 2019 May;75(5):721-722
pubmed: 30563723
Diagn Interv Radiol. 2015 Sep-Oct;21(5):382-4
pubmed: 26200484
N Engl J Med. 2018 May 10;378(19):1767-1777
pubmed: 29552975
Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2018 Nov;21(4):473-487
pubmed: 30104656
Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2020 Mar;23(1):88-93
pubmed: 31239513
J Urol. 2016 Aug;196(2):562-9
pubmed: 26791931